BUSH AND THE MEDIA: PARAMOUNT-CRITICAL QUESTIONS ARE SIMPLY NOT BEING ASKED! Non-challenging interviews, same as before Iraq war.

(Photos:Google Images)

The news media is not livng up to the traditions of reporters such as CBS' Edward R. Murrow by asking hard-tough questions and not letting politicians off the hook so easily before they get a straight answer. Prime example is the one-on-one interviews with President Bush.

The most paramount-critical questions that would provide a deeper insight into how President Bush thinks and formulates his foreign policy decisions in his role as president of the U.S.A. are not being asked by any of the media people in their one-on-one/face-to-face- interviews that I have seen. The interviews are either weak, moderately strong, non-thought provoking and non-challenging. It seems the media will ask certain questions to give the impression they are being tough, but in fact their hidden agenda appears to be to tacitly allow the interviewee to continue down the same flawed path of giving scripted answers, so there will be more interviews in the future, perhaps: “We can’t do anything to upset the President, or make him dislike us. He might not give us another interview, or he may not invite us to another party.” Those are some of the impressions I am normally left feeling after seeing such interviews.

I recently watched Wolf Blitzer of CNN interview the President in a one-on-one right after his September 19th speech before the United Nations (UN) in New York . Wolf Blitzer covered quite a few important areas, one in particular concerning Iran and its nuclear program. And why the President refuses to meet with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran since he was currently in the U.S.A. and also in New York as well after giving a speech before the UN some several hours after President Bush made his presentation on the same day.

Wolf Blitzer reminded the President that leaders such as Sadat of Egypt and Nixon of the U.S.A. had seized the moment by stepping up to the plate and taking the lead during times when there were tensions or serious disagreements with other leaders of the world, For example, Blitzer stated, President Nixon reopened the doors to China with his historic visit there in 1972. And Anwar Sadat visited Israel in 1977. Two perfect examples. However, President Bush remained entrenched in his myopic position that he would not communicate directly with any official of the Iranian government, including President Ahmadinejad, until they have suspended their uranium enrichment. “They know my position, already,” the President stated, with his usual arrogant smirk.” Admittedly and respectfully, Wolf Blitzer was firm and to the point, but not consistent and tough enough with follow-up questions.


Plainly stated, Wolf simply failed to ask the President a few paramount-critical and relevant questions, such as: “Mr President, you represent the U.S.A., a super power, but is just one of the many sovereign countries belonging to the UN. Could you, sir, share with the American people and the rest of the world, exactly from where do you or the U.S. get the authority or right to unilaterally dictate and threaten another sovereign country and member of the UN as to what that country must do or not do? Sir, why are you or the U.S. and not the UN telling Iran what is or is or is not acceptable? And if the Iranian government doesn’t comply, what the consequences will possibly be? And one last question, which is clearly related to the previous ones. President Chavez of the Venezuela during his castigating speech against you before the UN on September 20th, in which he stated, and I quote: “ He speaks as if he is the owner of the world.” Does he have a point? Do you think you are the owner or policeman of the world? Is there any truth to that charge, sir?

No one that I can recall has openly challenged the President with those types of tough, to-the-point, hard questions. Not those that normally get one-on-one-interviews. The only news person that comes to mind that will challenge the Bush administration with pure boldness and tenacity is Helen Thomas (columnist for Hearst News Service). Quite naturally Ms Thomas never gets a one-on-one interview, not that I am aware, with the President because she is a relentless interviewer. And also due to the fact she is actually hated by the White House; or more likely, feared. As one DailyKos blogger asked: "Where the hell is Helen Thomas to conduct a REAL interview when we need her....or a David Gregory even.. I fervently pose the same sane question(?).

It’s doubtful-of course- if posing hard-tough questions would sway the President to change his Evangelican driven mind or alter his fixed-stubborn positions and perspectives. But at least the public will know and appreciate the fact he is being put to the real test by the media. And that it is no longer “deja vue” all over again in which the media failed to hold President Bush’s feet to the fire with probing questions leading up to the Iraq war. You decide!
_______________
Read more about Helen Thomas and Edward R. Murrow, respectively, at: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2002/thomas-1106.htmlln
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_R._Murrow

DailyKos Blogger's comments: http://docgonzo.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/9/7/05247/63319